Rihanna was the musical guest on last night's 'Saturday Night Live,' hosted by Anne Hathaway.

The singer premiered "Stay," a new song off her upcoming album, "Unapologetic."While the song usually features Mikky Ekko, Rihanna sang it solo.

We know you spent all weekend crying over the news that Justin Bieber and Selena Gomez have broken up -- and likely so did the Biebs.

On Friday, multiple sources confirmed that the couple, who had been dating for nearly two years, called it quits about a week ago. Sources also claim it was the 20-year-old actress who decided it was time to end the relationship, in part because of their "crazy schedules" and because she had major "trust issues" with Bieber.

Bieber was already rumored to have moved on with Victoria Secret model Barbara Palvin, who he took to see "The Lion King" on Broadway, though the model was quick to deny it.

The breakup seems to have Bieber thrown for a loop. In an interview with Open House Party on Nov. 10, he neither confirmed nor denied the split, telling radio host John Garabedian, "I don't know what to say. I don't know what's going on in my life. To even assess that it doesn't make sense 'cause I have not made any comment."

Bieber seemed more than a little annoyed by the question about the breakup, but some of his recent tweets definitely sound like those of a man who was recently dumped.

"Thank you Boston. Focused on the positive. #30MillionBeliebers with me. I'm never leaving you because you are always there for me," the 18-year-old singer tweeted after his concert on Nov. 11.

But all hope may not be lost, as sources have told TMZ that couple known as "Jelena" might not be totally dunzo. Bieber reportedly wants to give it another go, and it could happen since they've broken up several times before.

While Bieber may want Gomez back, we have a feeling there is more to their breakup than meets the eye. Shortly after news of the breakup hit on Friday night, several of Gomez's "Wizards of Waverly Place" cast members chimed in on Twitter to support their girl.

Actor David Deluise, who play's Gomez' on-screen father, is clearly very dad-like off-screen as well. "All woman should be treated with respect! Listen up boy @selenagomez," he wrote and posted a photo of himself and Gomez. Meanwhile, Gomez' on-screen mother played by Maria Canals-Barrera, also tweeted support for the actress: "With my beautiful, talented and STRONG @selenagomez on our last day of filming the #WizardReunionSpecial"

And it's not just her on-screen parents who have her back either. Actress Jennifer Stone, who plays Gomez' quirky BFF, tweeted, "That's why you don't rob the cradle, because babe's be trippin."

All of this leads us to believe they may never, ever get back together.

The Universal Periodic Review has come, and gone, and as usual there seems to be general satisfaction in Sri Lanka as to how it went. I have no doubt that the generally excellent team sent from Sri Lanka performed well, and gave sensible answers to the questions raised.

What is sad, though, is that the Review seems to have become an end in itself. Some of the blame for this should go to a few organizations who see this as a chance to attack Sri Lanka, whereas the original conception of the UPR was that it would provide an opportunity for all stakeholders to work together to improve the Human Rights situation in the country under review.

It is in that spirit that Sri Lanka should approach the Review, and this was what I thought happened last time round, in 2008. On that occasion we made a number of voluntary pledges, and then accepted several of the recommendations made by other countries. I believe that was done sincerely, and certainly we made a great effort to move on many matters, ranging from formulation of a National Action Plan and a Bill or Rights, to training for the Police, and of course the fantastic effort we made with regard to resettlement of the displaced.

However several matters fell by the wayside. A good reason for this – though it should have spurred us to greater efforts after the emergency situation had passed – was the continuation of the conflict and the problems caused by the large numbers the Tigers had held hostage, who had to be rescued and nursed back to health, and resettled with basic facilities. A not so good reason was the abolishment of a dedicated Ministry for Human Rights. As a result the pledges made could not be pursued consistently.

I am not sure of the reasons for this fateful omission. I was told that Human Rights would be looked after by the Foreign Ministry, but this did not happen, and the Secretary to that Ministry told me categorically that the Ministry did not have the capacity to take on the responsibility. He said that it could deal with the international dimension, but even this did not happen. Whereas previously we had responded promptly to any communication from UN special procedures in Geneva, after 2010 many queries were left unanswered. The Secretary, indeed, told me he thought replied had been sent, but the officers who had moved from our Ministry to the Foreign Ministry, and found little support there, told me nothing had been done. This is reflected in the reports on Sri Lanka that have been presented since by mandate holders such as the Working Group on Involuntary Disappearances.

Thus we find that, amongst the questions posed to us this time round, by the United Kingdom, is one about investigation of the 5.653 open cases on record. Not having looked at the statistics recently, I cannot be sure, but I believe many of these relate to the 90s, and that there have not been many additions to the record in recent years. I would also think that these additions relate to the period of conflict, and not the last couple of years. But, whatever the situation, we should clarify the position, and investigate recent cases.

With regard to the individual cases of recent years, we should ask the police to expedite action, and issue regular updates. And, for disappearances during the last phase of the conflict, we should, as enjoined also by the LLRC, set in place thorough mechanisms to collate information and provide closure where possible to the bereaved.

Unfortunately, perhaps understandably given the many unfair charges flung at us, we see the problem as one which requires defence mechanisms, not increased efforts to get at the truth if possible. As a result, it is assumed that we have something to hide, whereas in most cases it is clear that there was no culpability as far as our forces went for the deaths that occurred.

The assumption that we have something to hide is increased by a lack of precision on our part. The BBC correspondent Charles Haviland has noted, and tweeted, that Minister Samarasinghe says the military court investigating allegations, presumably with regard to disappearances of those who surrendered, has five members and met 30 times, while former Attorney General Mohan Peiris says it has seven members and met 50 times.

Doubtless there is a simple enough explanation for this, but it should be provided, and senior representatives of government should ensure that they have precise knowledge of the facts and share information with each other. We cannot allow ourselves to be irritated by the fact that many so-called stakeholders are more concerned with denigrating Sri Lanka than improving our Human Rights situation. The bottom line is that people have died or disappeared, and it is our responsibility to address the grief of those who have been bereaved, assuage it as possible, and ensure closure with regard to the uncertainties that the war engendered.

It is in that spirit of responsibility that I hope we will build on whatever occurred at the UPR. While we must deal firmly with unfair allegations, we must recognize that, as with every other country, there is room for improvement. We should therefore immediately set up a mechanism to fulfil the pledges we have made and implement the recommendations we have accepted.

There is no substitute for this purpose to a dedicated Ministry. Mahinda Samarasinghe has dealt fairly effectively with various challenges in this regard, but it is not fair to expect him to continue to defend a record he has no input into improving. It would also be useful to include implementation of the LLRC Recommendations into the brief of such a Ministry, since they have a close bearing on Human Rights.

At a time when much investment is made on developing transport infrastructure, these examples from Sri Lanka’s own history cannot be over emphasized. For transport infrastructure to succeed in providing the desired and sustainable economic impetus requires getting the correct synergies. Careful planning to connect the areas of production and consumption and the export nodes and for these nodes to be value additions, is essential for transport investments to yield adequate economic returns.

Comparatively the development of transport since independence has been disappointing. The canal system has all but disappeared and rendered non-functional. The railway has continuously lost market share and has become a commercial burden even though its economic potential remains. The road network is overcrowded, slow and unsafe. The bus network has not been reformed to suit the open-market conditions. Institutions charged with these functions have grown in size and in budgets they execute, but their services have continuously deteriorated.

There has been no serious effort to develop a national transport strategy or transport network. The Southern Highway, Katunayake Expressway, Port of Hambantota and Hambantota International Airport are not a part of any known overall strategic plan to develop the country’s resources for trade or consumption. Most transport infrastructure projects are piece-meal investments. Today they are a plethora of unsolicited proposals. On the other hand the budgeted expenditure for 2013 for all modes of transport exceeds Rs 250 billion or nearly 4 percent of GDP. The question we need to ask is whether they will bear fruit as much as the transport investments that were made in the 18th and 19th century.

Most of this expenditure will flow through engineers and engineering institutions both state and private. While such spending should be heralded as good news to the industry, it also brings with it the responsibility of spending such large sum of money wisely for the future well being of the country. I have considered that there are areas of concern that engineers today should respond to in discharging their professional responsibility.

Engineering developed as a profession and earned its place in society as a contributor to social well being and improved quality of life. The first professional institute of engineering, the Institute of Civil Engineers in UK, was formed in 1818 with very altruistic principles worthy of being recalled today. For example the ICE Charter states that its objectives are:

“……the general advancement of mechanical science, and more particularly for promoting the acquisition of that species of knowledge which constitutes the profession of a civil engineer; being the art of directing the great sources of power in nature for the use and convenience of man, as the means of production and of traffic in states, both for external and internal trade, as applied in the construction of roads, bridges, aqueducts, canals, river navigation, and docks.”

This objective was established in the beginning of the 19th century at the end of the industrial age and the beginning of the railway age which had begun to replace water transport worldwide. This was also the thinking after the Renaissance of the 17th century where the inventions arising from the ‘advancement of science’ began to be applied to civil life and benefit as against military application. Engineering itself became more oriented towards being used for the ‘convenience of man’ as set out in the ICE charter.

Furthermore, it is interesting to note that the objectives of civil engineering were defined as ‘the production and transport (called traffic at that time) as represented in the construction of the required infrastructure for purpose of commerce and human settlements. This was the basis of engineering practice. This was the exact basis that secured the future of the economy of Sri Lanka where the transport networks of the 18th and 19th century were engineered.

The professional nature of engineering of the transport infrastructure at that time reflected a move away from infrastructure being used primarily for military use and for strengthening of political power to using it for economic development and social upliftment. This principle of professionalism in engineering has extended to all branches of engineering where inventions such as the steam engine were used primarily for civil use. The more modern fields such as electrical engineering and computing led to more consumer oriented goods with individual applications as against public infrastructure.

Since the beginning of professionalism in engineering, transport engineers have added value both globally and nationally, with extensive railway lines, canals, roads, ports and airports being planned, designed and constructed by famous engineers such as Thomas Telford the pioneer of the ICE and Isambard Kingdom Brunel considered as one of the greatest engineers of all times. The subsequent creation of the Suez Canal and the Panama Canal changed international trade patterns.

We need to ensure we add more value to the world than what is taken out from it. Today engineers are blamed for taking out of the environment’s increasingly scarce resources in large quantities than what is put back. We should be aware that transport activity is one of the biggest contributors to Climate Change. Minimizing resource use in transport infrastructure construction and in fact minimizing travel itself should become an objective of transport engineering. Thus our plans to build more infrastructure must be balanced with attaining a reduction in trips, travel distances, travel times and the associated negative impacts on both the environment and society.

It is thus the duty of engineers who have the opportunity to plan, design, and construct transport infrastructure to ensure that their professional intent is to safeguard against the negative impacts and that all transport infrastructure is created for the common good and not for the mere creation of monuments for leaders or for the consolidation of political or military power.

Unlike the work of a physician, teacher or lawyer, engineering is not a profession that can be practiced individually. It is work undertaken by a team for the community. Most engineering tasks require a planning, design, construction and operation or maintenance stage. Within these there are many specializations required, all of which need to come together.

In an engineering organization, the people undertaking these activities are bound together by processes which are fundamental to the practice of sound engineering. If you take these processes away then even engineers will not be able to practice engineering.

In the field of transportation engineering there has to be a planning phase. This is built on systematic data gathering, analysis and forecasting of future requirements. The detailed design phase for a transport infrastructure project such as a new expressway or new port or airport cannot be attempted without the required data gathering, planning and study.

The construction phase that follows cannot be implemented in keeping with the standards of engineering unless the design has been completed within reasonable cost, safety and performance levels. Of course maintenance becomes a nightmare if construction is not done properly. Such is the domino effect when even one process is subverted in building transport infrastructure. It is also true for other infrastructure.

It is necessary to understand that the processes that combine these activities are equally important. The feasibility study that communicates planning requirements to design stage cannot be done in haste.

Even though engineering institutions are well established, only a small fraction of funds voted through the consolidated budget is spent after due diligence studies or feasibility of the intended investment. It is sadly only for foreign funded projects that feasibility studies are done. The rush for speed often compromises the project reaping the potential economic benefits and indeed ensuring the minimization of resources and costs.

Today these engineering processes that were initially instituted by our Colonial masters are being dismantled in full public view. While the purposes of these processes when first instituted could be questioned, they were useful to ensure organizations serve the task they were set up for.

They are to ensure that transparency and accountability are built in to the core processes of each organization. Such processes be they for award of contracts or tenders, for recruitment or promotion or for engineering design or study or inquiry are built to honour, respect and protect the professional inputs that are the core competencies on which engineering organization should perform.

Like accounting standards, it is time for engineering standards to be developed that will stipulate the processes that should be followed in engineering planning and the special qualifications that engineers competent in planning should possess.

This is an urgent task given that in Sri Lanka most of what is planned is not implemented and that most of what is implemented is not planned. Engineers will fail in their duty to society unless we change such practices which are detrimental to the stable development of Sri Lanka’s economic base and social fabric.

May I then sum up that it is my belief that the future of our profession will be vastly benefitted from reflecting on our professional calling to be committed towards the convenience of man or what I call the common good and the past practices of setting up engineering processes and models of leadership. Any attempt to build infrastructure without building these very characteristics that identify it as a profession will only lead to the creation of monuments of both infrastructure and institutions. But a quick return to these practices will see the projects we develop become sustainable, productive and serve our nation, our people and the purposes we choose as a nation.

Concluded